this again? how many times have we seen a thread asking this?

That is subjective   and you are not a console  so   gamers opinions dont really count.


I'd say 360+Wii  the Xbox brand became huge this generation.  Just compare PS2 sales with PS3 and Xbox with 360.

And Wii because it actually won in terms of profit.

PS3 is the clear loser this gen. (even if it hits 130m in the future it will still have sold less than the ps2. So it lost customers)

By 2013? I think it's too ambiguous, honestly.

If it was 2010, then the Wii would be a no brainer, but Nintendo's bizarre sudden neglect from 2011 onwards have allowed the 360 and PS3 to cut the gap drastically, and still have a considerable chance of overtaking the Wii eventually. As much as they had a 4 year lead from the start, they are now also approaching a 3 year period of falling behind.

The 360's most instrumental factors behind it's success have had little to do with the system itself.

And I do think Sony let the PS3's initial problems go unaddressed far too long to be outweighed by the turnaround from 2009 onwards.

But seriously, what's this trivial nonsense about gaining/losing market share from previous generations? By that logic, I guess the Sega Mega Drive/Genesis mopped up the SNES.

that's why I'm saying PS3 won't reach 33% in legacy.  That much is obvious with a longer gen and better PS4 start, BUT PS3 is more expensive than PS2 was at this point in its life cycle and therefore has more mass market prices to reach to give itself boosts.

I still say the Wii won. The PS3 was a total screw up by sony initially and your right about microsoft only leaching off from sony. Remember what malstrom said ? Winning a console war is always about having the least bullshit and it was the WII that had the least bullshit. Sure nintendo dropped the ball half way in the WIIs lifespan but it was still alot better than the sub hd twins until near end of it's life. Since when did third party support ever matter to a nintendo console ever since the n64 days ? (Except for portables ofcourse.) The WII was able to thrive without alot of third party support so why are you so down about nintendo consoles not getting any ? You're right about the AAA game model being unhealthy but at the same time those AAA games are the ones sustaining the gaming industry! Whether you hate COD or BF or some other massive AAA game like GTA V they are the ones who are ironically saving the gaming industry too. 

Did i say something egotistical in this thread?

Is this a trick question?

Obviously the 360. If you take a big picture look, you see Microsoft going from having a very meager toe hold from the last generation to beating out Sony for the majority of this gen. It's a huge increase in market share and they probably will hold onto a significant amount of that share for the coming generation.

Couldn't agree more. And, unfortunately, next-gen seems to be following the same path...

Bolded 1: You're acting as if the thing was in the same boat as the Atari Jaguar lol. Going from the PS2 to the internet's #1 angry pitchfork mob haven was far from ideal publicity and certainly not what Sony was going for, but it still did better in it's first year than the 360 did in it's first year. I'll even say that the "XBone = new Sega Saturn" consensus is rather overkill.

Bolded 2: Explain. This could literally adhere to anything.

Bolded 3: The fuck? What are you gonna come up with next? The PS2 and Xbox were Hard Drive twins? The PS1 and Sega Saturn were CD twins? Just because Nintendo choose to be out of the loop concerning industry standards doesn't make the next most relevant systems in question identical.

Bolded 4: Because this further motivated Nintendo not to improve their 3rd party relations, since the average Wii consumers were buying the same 6-7 1st/2nd party titles, yet left others alienated.

It's stuff like this that I don't think we're gonna have a unanimously agreed winner for at least 5 years, and even then, it might still be unclear.